IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0007957.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Limits of Principal Components Analysis for Producing a Common Trait Space: Implications for Inferring Selection, Contingency, and Chance in Evolution

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin J Parsons
  • W James Cooper
  • R Craig Albertson

Abstract

Background: Comparing patterns of divergence among separate lineages or groups has posed an especially difficult challenge for biologists. Recently a new, conceptually simple methodology called the “ordered-axis plot” approach was introduced for the purpose of comparing patterns of diversity in a common morphospace. This technique involves a combination of principal components analysis (PCA) and linear regression. Given the common use of these statistics the potential for the widespread use of the ordered axis approach is high. However, there are a number of drawbacks to this approach, most notably that lineages with the greatest amount of variance will largely bias interpretations from analyses involving a common morphospace. Therefore, without meeting a set of a priori requirements regarding data structure the ordered-axis plot approach will likely produce misleading results. Methodology/Principal Findings: Morphological data sets from cichlid fishes endemic to Lakes Tanganyika, Malawi, and Victoria were used to statistically demonstrate how separate groups can have differing contributions to a common morphospace produced by a PCA. Through a matrix superimposition of eigenvectors (scale-free trajectories of variation identified by PCA) we show that some groups contribute more to the trajectories of variation identified in a common morphospace. Furthermore, through a set of randomization tests we show that a common morphospace model partitions variation differently than group-specific models. Finally, we demonstrate how these limitations may influence an ordered-axis plot approach by performing a comparison on data sets with known alterations in covariance structure. Using these results we provide a set of criteria that must be met before a common morphospace can be reliably used. Conclusions/Significance: Our results suggest that a common morphospace produced by PCA would not be useful for producing biologically meaningful results unless a restrictive set of criteria are met. We therefore suggest biologists be aware of the limitations of the ordered-axis plot approach before employing it on their own data, and possibly consider other, less restrictive methods for addressing the same question.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin J Parsons & W James Cooper & R Craig Albertson, 2009. "Limits of Principal Components Analysis for Producing a Common Trait Space: Implications for Inferring Selection, Contingency, and Chance in Evolution," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(11), pages 1-4, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0007957
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007957
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0007957
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0007957&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0007957?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kyle A Young & Jos Snoeks & Ole Seehausen, 2009. "Morphological Diversity and the Roles of Contingency, Chance and Determinism in African Cichlid Radiations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(3), pages 1-8, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0007957. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.